Manipur High Court
Khuprengthang Kom vs State Of Manipur & 2 Ors on 26 February, 2025
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Item No. 98-100
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 127 of 2025 with
MC(WP(C) No. 123 of 2025 with
WP(C) No. 673 of 2020
Khuprengthang Kom
.....Petitioner/s
- Versus -
State of Manipur & 2 Ors.
.... Respondent/s
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
Order
26.02.2025
[1] Present Mrs. Th. Babita, learned counsel for the
petitioner in WP(C) No. 127 of 2025 and Mrs. G. Pushpa, learned
counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 673 of 2020. Also present Mr.
Lenin Hijam, learned A.G. assisted by Ms. Ipham Sharmila Rahman,
learned counsel for the State respondent and officials of the State are
also present in the proceeding.
[2] In terms of the order dated 21.02.2025, State respondent
has filed an additional affidavit in both the matters showing the lists of
persons to be affected by the expansion of the proposed road.
[3] Mrs. G. Pushpa, learned counsel for the petitioners in
WP(C) No. 673 of 2020, submits that the interim order dated
16.12.2020 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 673 of 2020 is not ex-
parte interim order and was passed in the presence of learned G.A.
Hence, an application for vacating the interim order is required in terms
of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of High
Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P. reported in (2024) 6
SCC 267. It is also submitted that petitioner No. 12 in WP(C) No. 673
of 2020 is a displaced person and due to the prevailing situation, she
has no instruction in this regard. Learned counsel for the petitioners in
WP(C) No. 673 of 2020, has also filed reply to the additional affidavit
filed by the State respondent.
[4] Mrs. Th. Babita, learned counsel for the petitioner in
WP(C) No. 127 of 2025, submits that in the preliminary affidavit filed by
the respondent in compliance of the common order dated 21.02.2025,
it is stated that the State respondent will rely on the counter affidavit of
WP(C) No. 673 of 2020. However, it is stated that a copy of the counter
affidavit in WP(C) No. 673 of 2020 is furnished during the course of
hearing. It is prayed that at least some time may be given to file reply to
the preliminary affidavit.
[5] On the other hand, Mr. Lenin Hijam, learned A.G., relies
on the judgment of the High Court Bar Association, Allahabad with
respect to the following paras i.e. para 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 38, 44, 45, 47
& 54 wherein it is stated that on conjoint reading all these paras, an
application for vacating the interim order is not required. Learned A.G.
also submits that in terms of the provisions of the Specific Relief Act
and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as (2022) 6
SCC 127, no stay can be granted in the infrastructure project.
[6] Due to paucity of time, the proceeding in these matters
cannot be completed today.
[7] List this case on 04.03.2025.
[8] Earlier interim order in WP(C) No. 673 of 2020 is
extended till the next date. Even though learned A.G. withdraws the
earlier undertaking in WP(C) No. 127 of 2025, considering the ongoing
examination, the petitioners shall not be evicted till next date.
JUDGE
Kh. Joshua Maring
KH. KH. JOSHUA
JOSHUA MARING
Date: 2025.02.27
MARING 14:35:33 +05'30'
